Well, you said that you don't buy the "we've only played youngsters" excuse, even though we clearly did play youngsters. Then you went on to say that City losing with their first team to Stuttgart is different because "maybe they were trying out a few different formations etc.".
So the question is simple: why?
The point I was making was that it doesn't count if you're playing kids all the time. No one seriously believes that many of them will be pushing for the first team. Surely the purpose of the preseason is to get the first team up to scratch. To do that you have to have a number of games where the actual starting team is likely to play otherwise there's no point. We will have had 6 preseason games, most with a lot of kids playing and two in two days. Now I wouldn't normally give a shit but my main irk here is not the results or even the performances but some evidence that we have some sort of coherent preseason following last year's utter shambles. We should have used the time to experiment with different systems etc too. Ok we played 4-3-3 but again with a mixture of players.
All the drama queens are getting upset on here saying people are over-reacting to a pre-season result. Well that isn't my beef, it's that we haven't learnt anything about our players or system other than 'cleverly looks decent' (fair enough). The likelihood is that we will end up bringing in a creative central player and a key central defender who will have had no time with the team at all. Then we have all the same injuries again. Let's all hope that we've been secretly playing a 2-3-2-3 formation under closed doors that no one will ever expect when it comes to Watford.